Update Symbol From Library

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description reveals the tool skips mirror-cache entries (__m0, __m90, …) and flattens power symbols, which are important side effects. It also explicitly notes it's equivalent to KiCad's Update Symbol from Library, adding behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and front-loaded, with the main action stated first, followed by two behavior notes and a usage note. Every sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the core purpose, key transformations, and file-scope options. Combined with the fully described schema and existing output schema, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to know what to expect. It doesn't mention backup/repair features, but those are documented in the schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already provides descriptions for all 7 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by clarifying the relationship between projectsDir and schematicPath, explicitly stating one is for folder-wide updates and the other for a single file, which is not obvious from the schema alone.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool refreshes embedded lib_symbols cache entries from a KiCad symbol library, referencing KiCad's Update Symbol from Library. It further specifies skipping mirror-cache entries and flattening power symbols, making the purpose concrete and distinct from other symbol-related tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context by telling the user to pass projectsDir for updating all schematics in a folder or schematicPath for one file, indicating when each parameter is appropriate. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the guidance is sufficient.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.